DOCSLIB.ORG

Chemical-Specific Maximum Allowable Levels for Pesticide Residues in T Dietary Supplements ∗ Rebecca E

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chemical-Specific Maximum Allowable Levels for Pesticide Residues in T Dietary Supplements ∗ Rebecca E Food and Chemical Toxicology 123 (2019) 511–519 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Food and Chemical Toxicology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/foodchemtox Chemical-specific maximum allowable levels for pesticide residues in T dietary supplements ∗ Rebecca E. Adams , Julie A. Brickel1, Virunya S. Bhat NSF International, 789 N. Dixboro Rd, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Dietary supplements are regulated by the U.S. FDA as a subset of foods. Most botanical dietary ingredients do not Risk assessment have pesticide tolerances, resulting in the enforcement of zero tolerance or general maximum residue limits Pesticide residue (GMRL), rather than utilizing science-informed tolerances. In the current study, chemical-specific maximum Pesticide tolerance allowable levels (MALs) were derived for 185 pesticides by converting existing, authoritative-body human Pesticide contaminant health effects criteria. MALs were derived for 96% of pesticides using criteria established by the U.S.EPA.If Dietary supplement multiple authoritative-bodies had established human health effects criteria, the most scientifically-defensible Botanical ingredient criteria was selected, taking into consideration both carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic endpoints. Five pesti- cides (o-phenylphenol, pirimicarb, oxadixyl, tetradifon, o,p'-DDT), lacking criteria established by the U.S. EPA had criteria established by other authoritative-bodies that were utilized in the derivation of MALs. Two pesti- cides did not have any established human health effects criteria (o,p'-DDD and o,p'-DDE). In total, MALs were derived from existing criteria for over 98% of the pesticides in the present study. Consequently, it is demon- strated that human health effects criteria derived by authoritative-bodies can be effectively utilized toderive chemical-specific, science-informed MALs applicable to all food commodities, including botanical ingredients, thereby, minimizing reliance on precautionary zero tolerance and GMRLs. 1. Introduction adults, has contributed to the increase in dietary supplement con- sumption with the industry's overall U.S. economic impact valued at 1.1. United States (U.S.) dietary supplements industry more than $120 billion or 0.68 percent GDP in 2016 (CRN, 2016; Dunham, 2016; Low et al., 2017). Importantly, botanical dietary sup- In the early 1940s, the first multivitamin tablet was introduced to plements form a large segment of this market with reports of 61 million U.S. markets (NIH, 2007). Since then, growth in dietary supplement use people taking herbals/botanicals (Low et al., 2017; CRN, 2016). has accelerated rapidly with 76% of U.S. adults, or more than 170 million people, consuming dietary supplements each year (CRN, 2017). 1.2. Current U.S. regulations According to a 2016 Consumer Survey on Dietary Supplements, general population growth, along with an increase in usage among younger In the U.S., dietary supplements are regulated by the U.S. Food and Abbreviations: ADI, Acceptable Daily Intake; APVMA, Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority; BMDL, Benchmark Dose Level; CAS, Chemical Abstracts Service; DSHEA, Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act; EC, European Commission; EFSA, European Food Safety Authority; EMA, European Medicines Agency; EU, European Union; FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization; FFDCA, Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act; FQPA, Food Quality Protection Act; GAP, good agriculture practices; GMP, good manufacturing practice; GMRL, general maximum residue limit; IRIS, Integrated Risk Information System; JECFA, Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives; JMPR, Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues; LOAEL, Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level; MAL, maximum allowable level; MRL, maximum residue limit; NOAEL, No Observed Adverse Effect Level; NOP, National Organic Program; NPS, nonpoint-source; OSF, Oral Slope Factor; PAD, Population Adjusted Dose; PMRA, Pest Management Regulatory Agency; POD, Point-of-Departure; PTDI, provisional Tolerable Daily Intake; RfD, Reference Dose; RSC, Relative Source Contribution; SCCS, Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety; TDI, Tolerable Daily Intake; TTC, Threshold of Toxicological Concern; UF, uncertainty factor; US. EPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; U.S., United States; USDA, United States Department of Agriculture; U.S. EPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; U.S. FDA, U.S. Food and Drug Administration; USP, U.S. Pharmacopeia; USP-NF, USP-New Formulary; WHO, World Health Organization ∗ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (R.E. Adams), [email protected] (J.A. Brickel), [email protected] (V.S. Bhat). 1 Present address: Burdock Group, 859 Outer Rd, Orlando, FL, 32814, USA. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2018.11.045 Received 11 October 2018; Received in revised form 16 November 2018; Accepted 19 November 2018 Available online 20 November 2018 0278-6915/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. R.E. Adams et al. Food and Chemical Toxicology 123 (2019) 511–519 Drug Administration (U.S. FDA) as a subset of foods under the Dietary pesticide contamination, chemicals can enter and contaminant water Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) of 1994 (DSHEA, and food sources through direct application, runoff, and atmospheric 1994). Dietary supplements containing botanical dietary ingredients deposition (U.S. EPA, 2005a). In response to NPS pesticide con- have concentration-based pesticide tolerances established by the U.S. tamination, the U.S. FDA has set action levels for discontinued histor- Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) or, in some cases, by the ical pesticide chemicals that persist in the environment; however, these U.S. FDA. Per the enforcement criteria, the pesticide tolerances in action levels were established only for non-botanical specified crops or dietary supplements containing botanical dietary ingredients are set to commodities (USP, 2016). Therefore, unlike crops and commodities, the same levels as foods (DSHEA, 1994; U.S. FDA. CPG Sec. 575.100). botanicals that are subject to unavoidable NPS pesticide contamination Tolerances for pesticides are governed by the Federal Food, Drug continue to be held to the zero tolerance regulation (40 CFR 180.5). and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) of 1938 (FFDCA, 1938a). The FFDCA au- thorizes the U.S. EPA to establish a tolerance for the maximum amount 1.5. Pesticide regulations in Canada and the European Union (EU) or concentration of a pesticide residue that may be legally present in or on a treated raw agricultural commodity or issue an exemption for a The Canadian Food and Drugs Act and Regulations authorizes the pesticide from the requirement of a tolerance (U.S. FDA. CPG Sec. Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) to establish concentra- 575.100). Currently, the U.S. EPA establishes pesticide tolerances as tion-based MRLs for pesticide-crop combinations (Health Canada, part of the food safety equation ensuring that pesticides can be used 2015). However, in contrast to the zero tolerance approach utilized in with “reasonable certainty of no harm” (U.S. EPA, 2017a). A pesticide the U.S., when an MRL has not been established for specific pesticide- tolerance, or maximum residue limit (MRL), is the concentration of a crop combinations, the PMRA applies a General MRL (GMRL) of pesticide residue allowed to remain in or on each treated food com- 0.1 ppm (Health Canada, 2017; USP, 2016). Similarly, in the EU, con- modity (U.S. EPA, 2017a). Consequently, current regulations rely on centration-based MRLs are set by the European Commission (EC) for all pesticide tolerances specific to each crop, with food consumption data food and animal feed after the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) as a driver for which crops are evaluated. Because tolerances and action verifies that the residue is safe for all European consumer groups(EC, levels have primarily been established by the U.S. EPA for high-value 2008; EC, 2017). The regulation covers pesticides currently or formerly crops (e.g. grain, fruits, vegetables, etc.); many plant species do not used in agriculture in or outside the EU (EC, 2008; EC, 2017). Com- have established pesticide tolerances or action levels (40 CFR Part 180). parable to the regulations established in Canada, a GMRL is applied The U.S. FDA is responsible for the enforcement of pesticide toler- when a pesticide-crop combination has not specifically been evaluated ances and food additive regulations established by the U.S. EPA (EC, 2008; EC, 2017); however, the GMRL established by the EU of (FFDCA, 1938b; U.S. FDA. CPG Sec. 575.100). Under FFDCA Sec. 408, a 0.01 ppm is 10-fold more conservative than the GMRL established by raw agricultural commodity or a processed food or feed is deemed to be Canada (0.1 ppm) (EC, 2008; EC, 2017; Health Canada, 2017; USP, adulterated and subject to the U.S. FDA enforcement action if it con- 2016). tains either: 1) a pesticide residue at a level greater than that specified by a tolerance or food additive regulation, or, 2) a pesticide residue for 1.6. Maximum allowable levels (MALs) which there is no tolerance, tolerance exemption or food additive reg- ulation (FFDCA, 1938b; U.S. FDA. CPG Sec 575.100). An important The MALs derived for pesticides residues within this analysis are tolerance exemption to enforcement includes “unavoidable pesticide specific to dietary supplements. Thus, the MAL is the estimated daily residues” (U.S. FDA. CPG Sec 575.100). If a food or feed contains exposure level at which a chemical in dietary supplements is likely to be pesticide residues from sources of contamination that cannot be without an appreciable risk of adverse effects over an individual's avoided by good agriculture practices (GAPs) or good manufacturing lifetime. Due to the lack of pesticide tolerances and action levels and practices (GMPs), the U.S. FDA may establish an action level for such the subsequent enforcement of zero tolerance by the U.S. FDA on bo- unavoidable pesticide residues (U.S. FDA. CPG Sec. 575.100). An action tanical dietary ingredients typically found in dietary supplements, a level specifies the level below which the U.S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Liquid and Gas Chromatographic Multi-Residue Pesticide Determination in Animal Tissues
    Pestic. Sci. 1997, 49,56È64 Liquid and Gas Chromatographic Multi-residue Pesticide Determination in Animal Tissues Aurora Navas Dj az,* Angeles Garcj a Pareja & Francisco Garcj aSanchez Departamento de Qu•mica Anal•tica, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Malaga, 29071-Malaga, Spain (Received 13 June 1995; revised version received 17 April 1996; accepted 16 August 1996) Abstract: A liquid chromatography multi-residue method with photometric detection has been developed. The method is applicable to the quantitative deter- mination of organochlorine (tetradifon, dicofol, chlorfenson, chlorobenzilate), organophosphorus (fenitrothion, azinphos-ethyl) and carbamate (pirimicarb) pesticides in animal tissues. The extracted residues are cleaned up by gel- permeation chromatography. A further fractionation on silica Sep-Pack car- tridges is included in the procedure. A gas chromatographic method with electron-capture detection for the analysis of the same pesticides was carried out and the results in the two cases compared. Lower detection and quantitation limits and similar recoveries of pesticides from spiked pig liver and brain samples were obtained by the LC method. Key words: liquid chromatography, gas chromatography, multi-residue pesti- cides, animal tissues 1 INTRODUCTION by various element-sensitive detectors, leading to reli- ance on mass spectrometry because of its ability to help Pest control in modern agriculture includes treatment to deÐne the structure. This has especially been true in of crops pre- and post-harvest with a variety of chemi- the case of the combination of gas chromatography cals, such as herbicides and insecticides in the pre- with mass spectrometry (GC/MS). One of the obvious harvest stage and with fungicides and rodenticides in Ðelds of application for this technique was the analysis the storage stage of the total harvest process.
    [Show full text]
  • Pesticide Resistance in Bed Bugs Everywhere!!!!!
    2/24/2018 Pesticide Resistance in Bed bugs were virtually eradicated from the U.S. in Bed Bugs the post WWII era due to DDT and other powerful Shujuan (Lucy) Li insecticides. University of Arizona Alvaro Romero New Mexico State University 2 By the 1960s, bed bugs had developed resistance Public housing Apartments to DDT, methoxychlor and analogues, BHC, Schools dieldrin and analogues , and pyrethrins ( Busvine 1958, Hospitals Nursing homes Cwilich & Mer 1957, Mallis and Miller 1964 ) . Homes Transportation Child care Medical facilities Hotels & motels Health care facilities Airports Movie theaters Department stores Products, vendors, or commercial services mentioned or pictured in this seminar are for Everywhere!!!!! illustrative purposes only and are not meant to be endorsements. 3 4 University of Arizona; Arizona Pest Management Center 1 2/24/2018 Possible reasons for treatment failure? Missed some Clutter Reintroduction Have you seen these after treatments? 5 6 Dose - response assays for field - collected strains Bed bugs survived direct insecticide sprays 99 deltamethrin 90 Ft. Dix F1 50 ) e l a c 10 s t CIN1 i b o 1.0 r p ( y t i l a t r 99 - cyhalothrin o m e 90 g a t n Resistance ratio (RR) at least 6,000 !!! e c Ft. Dix r 50 e P 10 CIN1 Suspend® ( Deltamethrin ) 1.0 10 -7 10 -6 10 -5 10 -4 10 -3 10 -2 10 -1 10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 Treatment (mg active ingredient/cm 2 ) Products, vendors, or commercial services mentioned or pictured in this seminar are for illustrative purposes only and are not meant Romero et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification 2019 Theinternational Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) Was Established in 1980
    The WHO Recommended Classi cation of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classi cation 2019 cation Hazard of Pesticides by and Guidelines to Classi The WHO Recommended Classi The WHO Recommended Classi cation of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classi cation 2019 The WHO Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification 2019 TheInternational Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) was established in 1980. The overall objectives of the IPCS are to establish the scientific basis for assessment of the risk to human health and the environment from exposure to chemicals, through international peer review processes, as a prerequisite for the promotion of chemical safety, and to provide technical assistance in strengthening national capacities for the sound management of chemicals. This publication was developed in the IOMC context. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views or stated policies of individual IOMC Participating Organizations. The Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals (IOMC) was established in 1995 following recommendations made by the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development to strengthen cooperation and increase international coordination in the field of chemical safety. The Participating Organizations are: FAO, ILO, UNDP, UNEP, UNIDO, UNITAR, WHO, World Bank and OECD. The purpose of the IOMC is to promote coordination of the policies and activities pursued by the Participating Organizations, jointly or separately, to achieve the sound management of chemicals in relation to human health and the environment. WHO recommended classification of pesticides by hazard and guidelines to classification, 2019 edition ISBN 978-92-4-000566-2 (electronic version) ISBN 978-92-4-000567-9 (print version) ISSN 1684-1042 © World Health Organization 2020 Some rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Pesticides? Soralabs.Com the Top GMP Violations (483S) Issued by the FDA to Dietary Supplement Companies Have Been for Lack of Appropriate Specifications
    ISO 17025:2005 ISO 9001:2008 Accredited Certified 15366 US Hwy 160 Why screen Forsyth, Missouri 65653 Telephone: 877.645.8767 Direct: 417.546.8075 botanicals for Fax: 417.546.2398 [email protected] pesticides? SORALabs.com The top GMP violations (483s) issued by the FDA to dietary supplement companies have been for lack of appropriate specifications. 21 CFR §111.70 requires dietary supplement manufacturers to establish specifications for limits on contamination for your products. While the exact specifications are up to you, the FDA has clearly demonstrated through enforcement, that pesticide residue screening cannot be overlooked. SORA Labs offers pesticide analysis via our state-of-the-art GC/MS instrumentation. We’re equipped to meet all of your pesticide screening needs. USP<561> Pesticide List • Endosulfan (sum of isomers and • Methidathion • Alachlor endosulfan sulphate) • Methoxychlor • Aldrin and dieldrin (sum of) • Endrin • Mirex • Acephate • Ethion • Monocrotophos • Azinphos-ethyl • Etrimphos • Parathion-ethyl and Paraoxon ethyl • Azinphos-methyl • Fenchlorophos (sum of (sum of) • Bromide, inorganic (calculated as fenchlorophos and fenchloro-phos- • Parathion-methyl and Paraoxon- bromide Ion) oxon) methyl (sum of) • Bromophos-ethyl • Fenitrothion • Pendimethalin • Bromophos-methyl • Fenpropathrin • Pentachloranisole • Bromopropylate • Fensulfothion (sum of fensulfothion, • Permethrin and isomers (sum of) • Chlordane (sum of cis-, trans-, and fensulfothion-oxon, fensulfothion- • Phosalone oxychlordane) oxonsulfon, and fensulfothion-sulfon)
    [Show full text]
  • NMP-Free Formulations of Neonicotinoids
    (19) & (11) EP 2 266 400 A1 (12) EUROPEAN PATENT APPLICATION (43) Date of publication: (51) Int Cl.: 29.12.2010 Bulletin 2010/52 A01N 43/40 (2006.01) A01N 43/86 (2006.01) A01N 47/40 (2006.01) A01N 51/00 (2006.01) (2006.01) (2006.01) (21) Application number: 09305544.0 A01P 7/00 A01N 25/02 (22) Date of filing: 15.06.2009 (84) Designated Contracting States: (72) Inventors: AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB GR • Gasse, Jean-Jacques HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MC MK MT NL NO PL 27600 Saint-Aubin-Sur-Gaillon (FR) PT RO SE SI SK TR • Duchamp, Guillaume Designated Extension States: 92230 Gennevilliers (FR) AL BA RS • Cantero, Maria 92230 Gennevilliers (FR) (71) Applicant: NUFARM 92233 Gennevelliers (FR) (74) Representative: Cabinet Plasseraud 52, rue de la Victoire 75440 Paris Cedex 09 (FR) (54) NMP-free formulations of neonicotinoids (57) The invention relates to NMP-free liquid formulation comprising at least one nicotinoid and at least one aprotic polar component selected from the group comprising the compounds of formula I, II or III below, and mixtures thereof, wherein R1 and R2 independently represent H or an alkyl group having less than 5 carbons, preferably a methyl group, and n represents an integer ranging from 0 to 5, and to their applications. EP 2 266 400 A1 Printed by Jouve, 75001 PARIS (FR) EP 2 266 400 A1 Description Technical Field of the invention 5 [0001] The invention relates to novel liquid formulations of neonicotinoids and to their use for treating plants, for protecting plants from pests and/or for controlling pests infestation.
    [Show full text]
  • (Annex 2) Pesticide for Analysis
    (Annex 2) Pesticide for analysis No. Pesticide Compound No. Pesticide Compound 644 XMC XMC 430 Nitrothal-isopropyl Nitrothal-isopropyl 43 Azaconazole Azaconazole 433 Norflurazon Norflurazon 14 Acetochlor Acetochlor 68 Bioallethrin Bioallethrin 42 Atrazine Atrazine 479 Picolinafen Picolinafen 31 Ametryn Ametryn 482 Piperophos Piperophos 27 Allethrin Allethrin 516 Pyrazophos Pyrazophos 351 Isazophos Isazophos 520 Pyridafenthion Pyridafenthion 359 Isoxathion Isoxathion 642 Vinclozolin Vinclozolin 355 Isoprothiolane Isoprothiolane 252 Fenamiphos Fenamiphos 348 Iprobenfos(IBP) Iprobenfos(IBP) 260 Fenothiocarb Fenothiocarb 335 Imazamethabenz methyl ester Imazametha benzmethyl ester 470 Phenothrin Phenothrin 237 Ethion Ethion 254 Fenbuconazole Fenbuconazole 238 Ethofumesate Ethofumesate 264 Fenpropimorph Fenpropimorph α-Endosulfan 310 Fthalide Fthalide 226 α-Endosulfan β-Endosulfan 80 Bupirimate Bupirimate 445 Oxadiazon Oxadiazon 81 Buprofezin Buprofezin 446 Oxadixyl Oxadixyl 273 Flamplop-methyl Flamplop-methyl 456 Oxyfluorfen Oxyfluorfen 276 Fluacrypyrim Fluacrypyrim 96 Carfentrazone-ethyl Carfentrazone-ethyl 301 Flutriafol Flutriafol 91 Carbofuran Carbofuran 289 Flumioxazin Flumioxazin 530 Quinoxyfen Quinoxyfen 288 Flumiclorac pentyl Flumiclorac pentyl 529 Quinoclamine Quinoclamine 500 Propachlor Propachlor 531 Quintozene Quintozene 501 Propanil Propanil 135 Clomazone Clomazone 503 Propargite Propargite 126 Chlorthal-dimethyl Chlorthal-dimethyl 508 Propyzamide Propyzamide 124 Chlorpyrifos-methyl Chlorpyrifos-methyl 484 Profenofos Profenofos
    [Show full text]
  • China Releases New Maximum Residue Limits for Pesticides In
    GB 2763-2016 THIS REPORT CONTAINS ASSESSMENTS OF COMMODITY AND TRADE ISSUES MADE BY USDA STAFF AND NOT NECESSARILY STATEMENTS OF OFFICIAL U.S. GOVERNMENT POLICY Voluntary - Public Date: 3/31/2017 GAIN Report Number: CH17016 China - Peoples Republic of Post: Beijing China Releases New Maximum Residue Limits for Pesticides in Food Report Categories: FAIRS Subject Report Approved By: Lisa Anderson Prepared By: FAS Staff Report Highlights: On December 18, 2016, the Chinese National Health and Family Planning Commission, Ministry of Agriculture, China Food and Drug Administration released the National Food Safety Standard - Maximum Residue Limits for Pesticides in Foods (GB 2763-2016). The standard will replace the current MRL Standard (GB 2763-2014) and will be implemented on June 18, 2017. This report provides an unofficial translation of the standard. Editors’ Note: The asterisk appearing in the MRL column means that the limit is a temporary MRL. A temporary MRL is usually set under the following four conditions: 1. The dietary risk assessment data is incomplete; 2. The Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) is temporary (ADI is used as the basis for MRL setting); 3. There is no surveillance or analysis method for the MRL that complies with the standard requirements; 4. In emergency situations, the pesticide is approved to be used on un-registered crops. I GB 2763-2016 General Information: BEGIN TRANSLATION ICS 65.100 G 25 GB National Standard of the People’s Republic of China GB 2763—2016 Replacing GB 2763 - 2014 National food safety standard Maximum Residue Limits for Pesticides in Food General Information: National Health and Family Planning Commission Issued by: Ministry of Agriculture China Food and Drug Administration Issued on: 2016-12-18 Implementation:2017-06-18 II GB 2763-2016 Table of Content Preface ...............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Method Description
    Methods for Elements Method Method Description Analyte Calcium Copper Iron Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Magnesium EAM 4.4 Spectrometric Determination of Elements in Phosphorus Food Using Microwave Assisted Digestion Potassium Sodium Strontium Zinc Arsenic Cadmium Chromium Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Lead Spectrometric Determination of Arsenic, Manganese EAM 4.7 Cadmium, Chromium, Lead, Mercury and Mercury Other Elements in Food Using Microwave Molybdenum Assisted Digestion Nickel Selenium Uranium Vanadium Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Chromium Copper Method for Analysis of Bottled water for 18 Iron EAM 4.12 Elements by ICPMS Lead Manganese Mercury Nickel Selenium Thallium Uranium Zinc High Performance Liquid Chromatography- Inorganic arsenic, Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Dimethylarsinic acid (DMA), EAM 4.10 Spectrometric Determination of Four Arsenic Monomethylarsonic acid (MMA), Species in Fruit Juice Arsenobetaine (AsB) KAN-LAB-MET.95 Determination of Iodine in Foods Iodine Methods for Radionuclides Method Method Description Analyte Determination of Strontium-90 in Foods by WEAC.RN.METHOD.2.0 Strontium-90 Internal Gas-Flow Proportional Counting Americium-241 Cesium-134 Cesium-137 Determination of Gamma-Ray Emitting Cobalt-60 WEAC.RN.METHOD.3.0 Radionuclides in Foods by High-Purity Potassium-40 Germanium Spectrometry Radium-226 Ruthenium-103 Ruthenium-106 Thorium-232 Methods for Pesticides/Industrial Chemicals Method Method Description Analyte Extraction Method: Analysis of Pesticides KAN-LAB-PES.53 and
    [Show full text]
  • The 2018 European Union Report on Pesticide Residues in Food
    SCIENTIFIC REPORT ADOPTED: 24 February 2020 doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2020.6057 The 2018 European Union report on pesticide residues in food European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Paula Medina-Pastor and Giuseppe Triacchini Abstract Under EU legislation (Article 32, Regulation (EC) No 396/2005), EFSA provides an annual report which analyses pesticide residue levels in foods on the European market. The analysis is based on data from the official national control activities carried out by EU Member States, Iceland and Norway and includes a subset of data from the EU-coordinated control programme which uses a randomised sampling strategy. For 2018, 95.5% of the overall 91,015 samples analysed fell below the maximum residue level (MRL), 4.5% exceeded this level, of which 2.7% were non-compliant, i.e. samples exceeding the MRL after taking into account the measurement uncertainty. For the subset of 11,679 samples analysed as part of the EU-coordinated control programme, 1.4% exceeded the MRL and 0.9% were non-compliant. Table grapes and sweet peppers/bell peppers were among the food products that most frequently exceeded the MRLs. To assess acute and chronic risk to consumer health, dietary exposure to pesticide residues was estimated and compared with health-based guidance values. The findings suggest that the assessed levels for the food commodities analysed are unlikely to pose concern for consumer health. However, a number of recommendations are proposed to increase the efficiency of European control systems (e.g. optimising traceability), thereby continuing to ensure a high level of consumer protection.
    [Show full text]
  • Pesticides Act 1974
    LAWS OF MALAYSIA ONLINE VERSION OF UPDATED TEXT OF REPRINT Act 149 PESTICIDES ACT 1974 As at 1 June 2015 2 PESTICIDES ACT 1974 Date of Royal Assent … … … … 30 July 1974 Date of Publication in the Gazzette … … 29 August 1974 Latest amendment made by P.U. (A) 235/2011 which came into operation on … … … … 12 July 2011 PREVIOUS REPRINTS First Reprint ... ... ... ... ... 1983 Second Reprint ... ... ... ... ... 1997 Third Reprint ... ... ... ... ... 2001 Fourth Reprint ... ... ... ... ... 2006 3 LAWS OF MALAYSIA Act 149 PESTICIDES ACT 1974 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY Section 1. Short title, application and commencement 2. Interpretation PART II THE PESTICIDES BOARD 3. Establishment of the Board 4. Alternate members 5. Provision of facilities by Ministry 6. Proceedings of the Board PART III CONTROL OF IMPORTATION AND MANUFACTURE OF PESTICIDES BY REGISTRATION AND PERMIT 7. Application for registration of pesticides 8. Registration and refusal to register 9. Period of registration 10. Power to cancel registration 10A. Registrant shall inform Board about adverse effects of pesticide 4 Laws Of Malaysia ACT 149 Section 11. Appeal against decision of Board 12. Gazetting of pesticides 13. Prohibitions as to importation and manufacture, and penalty 14. Importation of pesticides for educational or research purposes 14A. Research or experiment on unregistered pesticides synthesized in Malaysia PART IV CONTROL OF MANUFACTURE, SALE AND STORAGE OF PESTICIDES BY LICENSING 15. Licence to manufacture pesticides 16. Appointment of Pesticides Licensing Officers 17. Licence to sell or store pesticides 18. Revocation and suspension of licence 19. Appeal against decision of Board or Pesticides Licensing Officer 20. Offences relating to manufacture, sale, and storage for sale PART V CONTROL OF PRESENCE OF PESTICIDES IN FOOD 21.
    [Show full text]
  • Suggested Insecticides for Managing Cotton Insects in the Lower Rio Grande Valley 2009
    E-7A 7-09 Suggested Insecticides for Managing Cotton Insects in the Lower Rio Grande Valley 2009 This publication is to be used with E-7, Managing Cotton Insects in the Lower Rio Grande Valley—2009. Suggested Insecticides for Managing Cotton Insects in the Lower Rio Grande Valley D. L. Kerns and M. G Cattaneo* A committee of state and federal research scientists and Exten- these field tests met the minimum requirements as outlined in the sion specialists meets annually to review cotton pest management Guidelines for the Annual Entomology Research Review and Ex- research and management guidelines. Guidelines are revised at tension Guide Revision Conference. Products listed must conform this meeting to reflect the latest proven techniques for maximiz- to our performance standards and avoid undue environmental ing profits for the Texas cotton producer by optimizing inputs and consequences. production. Suggested insecticide use rates have exhibited sufficient effi- cacy in tests to be effective in providing adequate control in field Management of Cotton Pests situations. However, it is impossible to eliminate all risks. Condi- tions or circumstances that are unforeseen or unexpected may The proper management of cotton pests is dependent upon the result in less than satisfactory results. The Texas AgriLife Exten- use of pest management principles. Pest management does not sion Service will not assume responsibility for such risks. Such rely solely on insecticides. Therefore, the USER of this insert is responsibility shall be assumed by the user of this publication. strongly encouraged to refer to E-7 for discussion of pest biology, Suggested pesticides must be registered and labeled for use by the scouting techniques, economic thresholds, insecticide resistance Environmental Protection Agency and the Texas Department of management, conservation of existing natural control agents, Agriculture.
    [Show full text]
  • The APPPC Sub-Regional Training Workshop for the Dnas on the Rotterdam Convention Focusing On
    REPORT APPPC SUB-REGIONAL TRAINING WORKSHOP FOR THE DESIGNATED NATIONAL AUTHORITIES ON THE ROTTERDAM CONVENTION FOCUSING ON INCREASING NOTIFICATIONS 13-17 MARCH 2017, SURABAYA, INDONESIA Executive Summary The APPPC Sub-regional Training Workshop for the DNAs on the Rotterdam Convention Focusing on Increasing Notifications was held from 13-17 March, 2017 in Surabaya, Indonesia and was attended by 33 participants from 9 countries. The main purpose of the workshop was to improve countries capacity in the implementation of the Convention, with the specific objective of strengthening DNAs in preparing notifications of FRA and SHPF, and also to increase the number of submission and improve the completeness of the information provided. The workshop provided training on the key elements of the Rotterdam Convention with special emphasis in strengthening and updating their knowledge on how to meet the obligation in submitting notification of FRA and SHPF. The status of import responses of the Annex III chemicals for each country was also discussed, and the participants were accordingly informed on the need to take action on pending responses. Participants became more knowledgeable on the provisions of the Rotterdam Convention and the latest status of its implementation through paper presentations during the workshop. During the exercise in the breakout groups, participants were also exposed to various forms and how to complete them in order to familiarize and facilitate them in making submission. Participants took part actively in the discussion during breakout and plenary sessions, and they exchanged knowledge, experiences and clarified issues and pointed to areas that need special attention. Among the issues discussed at length were on the need for an improved coordination and communication channel between DNAs and other relevant stakeholders at national level, so that all the requirements in meeting various obligations under the Convention are effectively decided.
    [Show full text]